Centralised Engineering At Lyneham
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: ecosse
Posts: 714
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Centralised Servicing was brought in at Ballykelly in 1968
All ac retained their Sqn markings and were still parked "outside" their respective Sqns
Prior to that, the Sqns, 203, 204, 210 and ASWDU prided themselves in declaring their serviceability rate at morning prayers,
Early am, on day 1 of the new event, crews were queing in the newly established Line Office (Previously ENI) to go flying and were told to be patient.
Appreciate now, all the groundies have been centralised as well
"Not sure where your ac is located"
"The F700 was here a minute ago"
"We think the bowser is on the way now"
"What time were you planning to get airborne"
"Are you the SAR Crew"
"Nobody told us about you"
"The WO is trying to find the flying programme"
"Your rations have gone to the north side"
"I'm not happy with this"
"This never happened on the Sqn"
"Sorry lads, please give us some time"
"Is that your transport leaving"
Anyone out there remember OC ENG - Formby of Formby - drove a RR Silver Ghost Mk1?
I bloody well do!
Then I got posted to Singapore - Ah well!
All ac retained their Sqn markings and were still parked "outside" their respective Sqns
Prior to that, the Sqns, 203, 204, 210 and ASWDU prided themselves in declaring their serviceability rate at morning prayers,
Early am, on day 1 of the new event, crews were queing in the newly established Line Office (Previously ENI) to go flying and were told to be patient.
Appreciate now, all the groundies have been centralised as well
"Not sure where your ac is located"
"The F700 was here a minute ago"
"We think the bowser is on the way now"
"What time were you planning to get airborne"
"Are you the SAR Crew"
"Nobody told us about you"
"The WO is trying to find the flying programme"
"Your rations have gone to the north side"
"I'm not happy with this"
"This never happened on the Sqn"
"Sorry lads, please give us some time"
"Is that your transport leaving"
Anyone out there remember OC ENG - Formby of Formby - drove a RR Silver Ghost Mk1?
I bloody well do!
Then I got posted to Singapore - Ah well!
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Wiltshire
Posts: 1,360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L-S
Having spent 15 years doing your job....ish there are several insults I could send your way, but I don't cos I am polite
As regards morale life in my office is less than satisfying as our lords and masters continue to give us a "right royal f@ck up the hoop, but you need to be there to appreciate that
Bogs......no pay..........dont do it it's quite simple as, unless things have changed since my days, you had to volunteer for the afore mentioned duty as no one could reasonably expect you to do something "of an objectional nature', as I vaguely remember
all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Having spent 15 years doing your job....ish there are several insults I could send your way, but I don't cos I am polite
As regards morale life in my office is less than satisfying as our lords and masters continue to give us a "right royal f@ck up the hoop, but you need to be there to appreciate that
Bogs......no pay..........dont do it
it's quite simple as, unless things have changed since my days, you had to volunteer for the afore mentioned duty as no one could reasonably expect you to do something "of an objectional nature', as I vaguely remember all spelling mistakes are "df" alcohol induced
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: various bits of UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents, why dont we stop the in fighting and ask the question... What will hapen to the moral after the HIOS program hits the streets later this year?
It means no more second line i.e. that fuction goes to Marshalls at cambridge and not the minor hangers at lyneham - a smaller pool of manpower to draw upon - a reduction in the knowledge base at that level of servicing - increased pressure...etc
It means no more second line i.e. that fuction goes to Marshalls at cambridge and not the minor hangers at lyneham - a smaller pool of manpower to draw upon - a reduction in the knowledge base at that level of servicing - increased pressure...etc
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: EU Region 9 - apparently
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But when the second line tasks are taken out to contractors all the operators will need to have done is between flights and fuel .... 
everything else will be by UPS
All tasks complete.
All pigs fed and ready for first wave.
everything else will be by UPS All tasks complete.
All pigs fed and ready for first wave.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I only recently 'remembered' these boards existed and have spent a few bemused hours reading some of the threads, including this one.
They ditched the trade desks on the line ? What (beyond removing headcount) was the logic? (apologies if this is covered elsewhere on here - I'm playing catch-up)
I was on ALSS, and at various times later AES and EOPS and saw the move away from 3-3-6 and the move to 24/30 (Eng) & 47/LXX (Eng) all of which caused varying degrees of upheaval, resentment, misinformation and grief but these latest moves sound to be even more painful.
I honestly feel for those affected
They ditched the trade desks on the line ? What (beyond removing headcount) was the logic? (apologies if this is covered elsewhere on here - I'm playing catch-up)
I was on ALSS, and at various times later AES and EOPS and saw the move away from 3-3-6 and the move to 24/30 (Eng) & 47/LXX (Eng) all of which caused varying degrees of upheaval, resentment, misinformation and grief but these latest moves sound to be even more painful.
I honestly feel for those affected
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ExEngo - Right then this is the way I think it is supposed to work (loosely):
It starts with the tasking coming from the likes of ascot etc to a group of strategic planers up in Eng Ops who set up a program forecasting the next 3 months (with the coming week being resolute).
Next it goes to the Line planers and docs they allocate tail numbers to tasking numbers and then go through the books and sort out a “to-do list”.
Next there are a number of line teams comprising of a Sgt and 4 bods of differing trades who will go through this to-do list and finish off by AF/Bf’ing it to make it serviceable. Each team is to have its own mobile servicing wagon housing tools, POL, gasses and some spares – i.e. they are to some degree self sufficient.
Still with me?
If there is a problem that needs same trade supervision or independents then this person has to be taken out of the other team – thus hampering or stopping this other team from completing their aircraft tech ready state.
If the job is too large (in terms of time) then it is to be passes onto what is essentially a huge Heavy Rects team who do have trade desks. If these cannot help then they go to the minor teams (who have moved back to their old hangars).
The teams are not allowed to be proactive i.e. they have to wait until they are tasked. – The Rects team cannot move unless asked by the line – and to that end aircraft are not supposed to be worked unless tasked.
So if we lose as has been said before 2nd line (to a contract with MA) then there goes part of the manpower pool. The next thing that will go will be the redundancies an even greater depreciation – in all about 150(ish)
There has been no consultation from the Exec Engineers with the SNCOs i.e. the ones who get posted away every 2 or 3 years will leave the others, who don’t, to fathom it out. This whole process has been enforced with out much communication or training, giving some of the most the professional engineers the attitude of “I don’t give a
” – and if I was a member of rompers green I would start to get a bit worried!
what do you think now?
It starts with the tasking coming from the likes of ascot etc to a group of strategic planers up in Eng Ops who set up a program forecasting the next 3 months (with the coming week being resolute).
Next it goes to the Line planers and docs they allocate tail numbers to tasking numbers and then go through the books and sort out a “to-do list”.
Next there are a number of line teams comprising of a Sgt and 4 bods of differing trades who will go through this to-do list and finish off by AF/Bf’ing it to make it serviceable. Each team is to have its own mobile servicing wagon housing tools, POL, gasses and some spares – i.e. they are to some degree self sufficient.
Still with me?
If there is a problem that needs same trade supervision or independents then this person has to be taken out of the other team – thus hampering or stopping this other team from completing their aircraft tech ready state.
If the job is too large (in terms of time) then it is to be passes onto what is essentially a huge Heavy Rects team who do have trade desks. If these cannot help then they go to the minor teams (who have moved back to their old hangars).
The teams are not allowed to be proactive i.e. they have to wait until they are tasked. – The Rects team cannot move unless asked by the line – and to that end aircraft are not supposed to be worked unless tasked.
So if we lose as has been said before 2nd line (to a contract with MA) then there goes part of the manpower pool. The next thing that will go will be the redundancies an even greater depreciation – in all about 150(ish)
There has been no consultation from the Exec Engineers with the SNCOs i.e. the ones who get posted away every 2 or 3 years will leave the others, who don’t, to fathom it out. This whole process has been enforced with out much communication or training, giving some of the most the professional engineers the attitude of “I don’t give a
” – and if I was a member of rompers green I would start to get a bit worried! what do you think now?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sumps - That's lunacy 
. Where do I start?:
The first few parts are situation normal - (except EOPS used to allocate tails based on known future hours / Return To Works etc requirements and daily 700 updates from the line)
Removing a dedicated depth of trade knowledge and more importantly, focus from the 1st Line Engineering organisation is nuts. I used to advocate the use of a 'ramp tramp' with a small forward holding of consumables but this is that writ large - too large.
Having (as a generalisation) relatively junior 'Preppies' who would snag things back to a trade desk was a good thing - it forced an assesment by a specialist eye. Dumping a SNCO with having to pull trade cover from someone generating aircraft or exercising some other judgement is piling many eggs in ever smaller baskets. Yes there would often be banter about the fairy preppers bringing in sumpy snags all night (inserts trades of choice here) but I think everyone liked the fact that there was always someone, a specialist, who had to get it checked out. I don't mean to imply that anyone's professional standards are being eroded, just that this current system seems to place more obstacles in the way of getting the right skills in front of the right snags in a timely fashion.
As for the lack of consultation with the Seniors - I have to say I am not surprised. Lyneham seems to have a reputation for militant SNCOs - I just wish those on high would stop and think why they think that - perhaps because it is one of a few units which retains it's experience in long-on-unit SNCOs who know WTF they are talking about !
As for the unreserved h'officer bashing on these boards, it'll always rankle but I would never challenge anyone's position on it: In my time on tours at Lyneham I met some total fools (at every level) who were an embarassment to to their colleagues. I also met one or 2 absolute stars who fought hard and bravely for what they felt to be right, sometimes to their own detriment (I'm talking from FgOff through to 2 OC Engs here). That said the people I met in my (brief) 10 year stint that I have heartfelt respect for to this day are SNCOs (some of whom may still be there so I'll shut up!
)
. Where do I start?:The first few parts are situation normal - (except EOPS used to allocate tails based on known future hours / Return To Works etc requirements and daily 700 updates from the line)
Removing a dedicated depth of trade knowledge and more importantly, focus from the 1st Line Engineering organisation is nuts. I used to advocate the use of a 'ramp tramp' with a small forward holding of consumables but this is that writ large - too large.
Having (as a generalisation) relatively junior 'Preppies' who would snag things back to a trade desk was a good thing - it forced an assesment by a specialist eye. Dumping a SNCO with having to pull trade cover from someone generating aircraft or exercising some other judgement is piling many eggs in ever smaller baskets. Yes there would often be banter about the fairy preppers bringing in sumpy snags all night (inserts trades of choice here) but I think everyone liked the fact that there was always someone, a specialist, who had to get it checked out. I don't mean to imply that anyone's professional standards are being eroded, just that this current system seems to place more obstacles in the way of getting the right skills in front of the right snags in a timely fashion.
As for the lack of consultation with the Seniors - I have to say I am not surprised. Lyneham seems to have a reputation for militant SNCOs - I just wish those on high would stop and think why they think that - perhaps because it is one of a few units which retains it's experience in long-on-unit SNCOs who know WTF they are talking about !
As for the unreserved h'officer bashing on these boards, it'll always rankle but I would never challenge anyone's position on it: In my time on tours at Lyneham I met some total fools (at every level) who were an embarassment to to their colleagues. I also met one or 2 absolute stars who fought hard and bravely for what they felt to be right, sometimes to their own detriment (I'm talking from FgOff through to 2 OC Engs here). That said the people I met in my (brief) 10 year stint that I have heartfelt respect for to this day are SNCOs (some of whom may still be there so I'll shut up!
)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: EU Region 9 - apparently
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sumps,
Niether /neither (sp?) still in, didn't apply, waiting for a letter (if it comes).
Looking at the situation from outside that particular fence, and being afraid.
Bets wishes, and luck.
L1
Niether /neither (sp?) still in, didn't apply, waiting for a letter (if it comes).
Looking at the situation from outside that particular fence, and being afraid.
Bets wishes, and luck.
L1
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L1
Saw your post in the ground forum, Im doning a lot of Soul serching/ reserching to alter the situation i asked a similar Q in the life after the RAF thread.
Good luck with the quest! - Sumps
Saw your post in the ground forum, Im doning a lot of Soul serching/ reserching to alter the situation i asked a similar Q in the life after the RAF thread.
Good luck with the quest! - Sumps
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Vero Beach, FL
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was Tech at Lyneham from 62 to 67 and worked at 3 levels of Centralised Servicing. I then spent 3 happy years in Germany with 17 and 3 Squadrons. What a difference, the morale and service life "on the Squadrons" was like being in a different Air Force. Lyneham was like G..........k with all the staff in the same uniforms.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, there's a VSA going on right now. This has to take place after an RIE.......okay I'll try and translate, but it might be a bit innaccurate because all I could hear was 'Blah blah blah'.
RIE (Rapid Improvement Event)
To have a brainstorming session with all the motivated youngsters with clipboards, dry marker pens and post it notes. Then, do it, straightaway.
Unfortunately, when you asked the Flt Sgt for people for this 'Lean Team', he gave you the sick notes, freaks and mentalists. And by rushing the job, without consulting the SNCO's, a botch job has been done, and it will have to be done again. The Lean Team are also under pressure to come up with more good ideas and end up producing really **** ones, bypassing many checks and balances that are in place for a reason.
VSA (Value Stream Analysis)
Something to do with checking the results of the changes that have been made
Now, this is more interesting, there are SNCO's a plenty involved here - a chance to show their balls. But this also involves a lot of people having meetings and carrying clipboards.
My spy in the camp informs me that it took 20 people all of Monday morning to decide that:-
a) Engineering Wing's task was to provide serviceable aircraft, in the correct role, to the customer.
b) It was lunchtime
This, to me, seems to be the chance to highlight any mistakes that have been made.
But bring the frightening prospect of changing it all around again.
I think I'll put some leave in.
RIE (Rapid Improvement Event)
To have a brainstorming session with all the motivated youngsters with clipboards, dry marker pens and post it notes. Then, do it, straightaway.
Unfortunately, when you asked the Flt Sgt for people for this 'Lean Team', he gave you the sick notes, freaks and mentalists. And by rushing the job, without consulting the SNCO's, a botch job has been done, and it will have to be done again. The Lean Team are also under pressure to come up with more good ideas and end up producing really **** ones, bypassing many checks and balances that are in place for a reason.
VSA (Value Stream Analysis)
Something to do with checking the results of the changes that have been made
Now, this is more interesting, there are SNCO's a plenty involved here - a chance to show their balls. But this also involves a lot of people having meetings and carrying clipboards.
My spy in the camp informs me that it took 20 people all of Monday morning to decide that:-
a) Engineering Wing's task was to provide serviceable aircraft, in the correct role, to the customer.
b) It was lunchtime
This, to me, seems to be the chance to highlight any mistakes that have been made.
But bring the frightening prospect of changing it all around again.
I think I'll put some leave in.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
I joined a really secret sqn that had just lost ALL its groundcrew and had one sgt left. OK, we were multi-skilled but we lost a lot of personal expertise - who could fix a radio or rewire a car etc.
When we went away we took one C/T and did all the AF/BF ourselves. Then we got to know 'our chief' and started to take 'our chief' on away trips. Other crews did the same.
Then the powers realised what was happening and stopped us taking 'our chief' as other chiefs were not getting the jollies. When we got really broke 'they' would send more hired help. Then we got 'our chief' AND 'our rigger'.
No substitute for 'our ground crew' and 'our aircraft' but what a difference it made at a very local level. And if Taff Skuse is around still I mean YOU <g>.
When we went away we took one C/T and did all the AF/BF ourselves. Then we got to know 'our chief' and started to take 'our chief' on away trips. Other crews did the same.
Then the powers realised what was happening and stopped us taking 'our chief' as other chiefs were not getting the jollies. When we got really broke 'they' would send more hired help. Then we got 'our chief' AND 'our rigger'.
No substitute for 'our ground crew' and 'our aircraft' but what a difference it made at a very local level. And if Taff Skuse is around still I mean YOU <g>.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: various bits of UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STANDBYFORBROADCAST...blah...blah...
Brace your selfs but...after one of the aforementioned VSAs I here that she who must be obayed is starting to relent over certain moves of or sizes of teams Is this a sign of cracks in the paint work? 
could we go back to normal?....Oh silly me we dont revisit old ground (such as JTs and FLMs) ... so what would we go back to then?...assuming we are going back...
Brace your selfs but...after one of the aforementioned VSAs I here that she who must be obayed is starting to relent over certain moves of or sizes of teams
Is this a sign of cracks in the paint work? could we go back to normal?....Oh silly me we dont revisit old ground (such as JTs and FLMs) ... so what would we go back to then?...assuming we are going back...
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK Sometimes
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
It must be tough at Lyneham right now as I know you lost friends too - but hang on in there. Perhaps this is not the time to be arguing?
But if what is happening IS really wrong - make sure you stand your ground but back your feelings up with FACTS and FIGURES (that is all that 'management' comprehend - a fact of life).
However, if Flight Safety could be compromised - don't faff - go for the jugular with FSO and a Murphy. Also, I suspect you will find the Sqns are on your side - they have to fly the ac that you service and so have a pretty personal interest to know it is being done correctly.
Best of British
It must be tough at Lyneham right now as I know you lost friends too - but hang on in there. Perhaps this is not the time to be arguing?
But if what is happening IS really wrong - make sure you stand your ground but back your feelings up with FACTS and FIGURES (that is all that 'management' comprehend - a fact of life).
However, if Flight Safety could be compromised - don't faff - go for the jugular with FSO and a Murphy. Also, I suspect you will find the Sqns are on your side - they have to fly the ac that you service and so have a pretty personal interest to know it is being done correctly.
Best of British
I can't get over what I've read about the Eng set up at Lyneham. What has happened in the last 12-15 years in RAF aircraft engineering is little short of a disgrace, and it shows no sign of abating.
As a means of entry, we have gone from Apprentices/Direct Entrants/Mechanics, to Mechanic (Technician Stream) / Mechanic (Mechanic Stream), to SAC (Technician): forthcoming is the Aircraft Maintenance Mechanic. All this in 13 years. Now somebody is trying to destroy the way we have operated for decades (and found the hard way that it is probably the BEST way too). It will not stop at Lyneham either. Some myopic so-and-so is doing their darndest to get rid of squadron groundcrew and all that goes with that, and I fear that at a Norfolk unit the end is already in sight.
To my oppos at Lyneham, please make sure we get to hear more about how it's going down there, and use the system to highlight failings, as this will give those of us who will be the next victims of the morale and tradition killing senior Engineering officers, a fighting chance to make things work, or at least not let our fliers down too many times.
As a means of entry, we have gone from Apprentices/Direct Entrants/Mechanics, to Mechanic (Technician Stream) / Mechanic (Mechanic Stream), to SAC (Technician): forthcoming is the Aircraft Maintenance Mechanic. All this in 13 years. Now somebody is trying to destroy the way we have operated for decades (and found the hard way that it is probably the BEST way too). It will not stop at Lyneham either. Some myopic so-and-so is doing their darndest to get rid of squadron groundcrew and all that goes with that, and I fear that at a Norfolk unit the end is already in sight.
To my oppos at Lyneham, please make sure we get to hear more about how it's going down there, and use the system to highlight failings, as this will give those of us who will be the next victims of the morale and tradition killing senior Engineering officers, a fighting chance to make things work, or at least not let our fliers down too many times.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay 9
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a sheltered life I’ve led. I only discovered the existence of PPRuNe a month or so ago and have been reading the various forums with interest and, in most cases, have found them humorous, instructive and enlightening. There does seem to be though, an awful lot of ill-informed conjecture on this particular thread and, having some knowledge on the why’s and wherefores of Lyneham’s Eng Wing reorganization, I may be able to throw a glimmer of light on the subject.
It all started with a techy down at MPA fitting a spinner incorrectly. Having done the job himself, he persuaded a junior to undersign him (wrong, I know, but I don’t know the pressures they were under at the time – unwilling to speculate). Later, engine started, prop turned, spinner thrown off dinking wing leading edge in the process. At the subsequent inquiry, less importance seemed to be placed on the fact that he had done the job incorrectly, what everyone latched onto was his statement that “the process of undersigning is common at Lyneham, it’s always been done like that” (the fact that the individual concerned was not stationed at Lyneham seemed to have been irrelevant!). This very public airing of Lyneham’s shortcomings prompted OC Eng to circulate a questionnaire to all members of Eng Wg asking for their comments and suggestions on a whole raft of subjects including perceived problems with engineering standards and practices, problems with tooling, problems with communication through the chain of command, etc. etc. The results were collated and a Working Group of Eng Wg management was formed, each being given one of these problem areas to sort out.
The end result was a series of VSA’s, RIE’s, End 2 End forums, and “lean” implementation up the ying yang, which would address the problems that the WORKFORCE had identified (see SPHL’s glossary of terms on page 8). In July 04, halfway through all this lot, came the news that as part of the SDR, the RAF would lose about 16% of its trained strength, almost 8000 personnel in real terms. The next bit is a little blurry round the edges, but someone stated (estimated?) that this reduction in personnel would account for almost 150 engineers from Lyneham; this was in addition to the 130 posts that were due to go under HIOS. This equated to a loss of about 60 personnel on 24/30 (Eng) Sqn and 90 on 47/70 (Eng) Sqn. You don’t need a calculator to come to the conclusion that, come the day of the revolution, the 2 Sqns which were barely viable with the manpower establishment they already had, could not absorb such a draconian cut in manpower and be able to perform their primary task.
So, coincident with the implementation of these various “initiatives” to improve the techy’s lot, a system had to be put in place that would be robust enough to be able to handle the loss of 150 or so engineers. This is what spawned the current Forward / Depth model that Lyneham are having such trouble with at the moment. The model wasn’t the idea of our lords and masters at High Wycombe, and neither was it that of OC Eng (who nevertheless signed up to it), the “initiative” came from within Eng Wg. Unfortunately, by the time that the SNCO’s were briefed on the new concept, it was written in stone and their opinions on the subject were never sought, their only task being to implement it. Even more unfortunately, the benefits of adopting this radical new system of operating was briefed to the PUS of S for Defence and the mandarins in Whitehall and also to a group of Officers in the US BEFORE the system was up and running. These actions, I would suggest, preclude a return to the old way of operating, as it would be political/career suicide. There was much scepticism (quite rightly) and well before the event, as far as I can gather, any questions posed by the guys at the coalface, were answered by the management in order to allay everyone’s fears.
Where it went wrong was on the day of its implementation. There was (and still is) confusion on how the model should operate. Who was supposed to be doing what? What is the chain of command? At what point do HLS hand the aircraft over to FLECS? Etc. etc. Ad nauseam. Luckily, the flying programme at that time of the year was quite light – the reason that the re-organization had been planned for that time – and it was perceived that any flaws in the system could be identified and rectified without too much grief. The problem was that each HLS shift had its own slant on how it should work and was consequently pulling in a different direction to the other 3. To the best of my knowledge, only one shift has tried to operate as the new system dictates and the others are doing what they can, however they can, to achieve the flying programme – see all the previous posts on professional pride - with the consequence that no-one can identify the points where it is all going pear-shaped as there are now several different ways in which people are trying to achieve the same end result.
Nightmare.
There are many posts on this thread from individuals venting their spleen at particular areas of the system that are failing, and I can wholeheartedly understand their concern as they are professional technicians who only want, at the end of the day, to do a good job, get the aircraft out on time every time and live a worry-free life. The fact that so many of these posts exist should be of great concern to those in positions of power (my spies tell me that there are individuals at 2 Gp who are very, very nervous about the way that things are shaping up at Lyneham). I am led to understand that finally, Lyneham engineering management has taken on board (to a degree) the fact that the system needs some serious manipulation in order for it to work and will therefore be having more VSA’s, RIE’s (here we go again) that will (hopefully) sort out all the problems, but this time, the SNCO’s are going to be the major players this time and fundamental in the planning of any further changes. To that end, I suggest that you all have a damn good think on how the system should operate and suggest that you post solutions from here on in and resist the temptation to present more instances of where the system is flawed. Why not send your ideas to the Station Change Team? Anonymously if need be, but if you want to be instrumental in tweaking the system, you have to make sure that your voice is heard, but be advised, a return to the old system will never be sanctioned.
Apologies for rambling on but hopefully this goes some way to filling the gaps in this thread and I hope that I have only presented the facts as opposed to my own emotive views on the subject.
My ideal:
1. All the flying Sqn’s have their own groundcrew. They would have to post people into Lyneham for that to work and that will certainly not happen.
2. Go back to 24/30 and 47/70 engineering. That will work fine until the manpower cuts start to bite and then Eng Wg would disappear up its own fundamental orifice.
3. Something radically different to what is currently in place.
Discuss.
Obe One
It all started with a techy down at MPA fitting a spinner incorrectly. Having done the job himself, he persuaded a junior to undersign him (wrong, I know, but I don’t know the pressures they were under at the time – unwilling to speculate). Later, engine started, prop turned, spinner thrown off dinking wing leading edge in the process. At the subsequent inquiry, less importance seemed to be placed on the fact that he had done the job incorrectly, what everyone latched onto was his statement that “the process of undersigning is common at Lyneham, it’s always been done like that” (the fact that the individual concerned was not stationed at Lyneham seemed to have been irrelevant!). This very public airing of Lyneham’s shortcomings prompted OC Eng to circulate a questionnaire to all members of Eng Wg asking for their comments and suggestions on a whole raft of subjects including perceived problems with engineering standards and practices, problems with tooling, problems with communication through the chain of command, etc. etc. The results were collated and a Working Group of Eng Wg management was formed, each being given one of these problem areas to sort out.
The end result was a series of VSA’s, RIE’s, End 2 End forums, and “lean” implementation up the ying yang, which would address the problems that the WORKFORCE had identified (see SPHL’s glossary of terms on page 8). In July 04, halfway through all this lot, came the news that as part of the SDR, the RAF would lose about 16% of its trained strength, almost 8000 personnel in real terms. The next bit is a little blurry round the edges, but someone stated (estimated?) that this reduction in personnel would account for almost 150 engineers from Lyneham; this was in addition to the 130 posts that were due to go under HIOS. This equated to a loss of about 60 personnel on 24/30 (Eng) Sqn and 90 on 47/70 (Eng) Sqn. You don’t need a calculator to come to the conclusion that, come the day of the revolution, the 2 Sqns which were barely viable with the manpower establishment they already had, could not absorb such a draconian cut in manpower and be able to perform their primary task.
So, coincident with the implementation of these various “initiatives” to improve the techy’s lot, a system had to be put in place that would be robust enough to be able to handle the loss of 150 or so engineers. This is what spawned the current Forward / Depth model that Lyneham are having such trouble with at the moment. The model wasn’t the idea of our lords and masters at High Wycombe, and neither was it that of OC Eng (who nevertheless signed up to it), the “initiative” came from within Eng Wg. Unfortunately, by the time that the SNCO’s were briefed on the new concept, it was written in stone and their opinions on the subject were never sought, their only task being to implement it. Even more unfortunately, the benefits of adopting this radical new system of operating was briefed to the PUS of S for Defence and the mandarins in Whitehall and also to a group of Officers in the US BEFORE the system was up and running. These actions, I would suggest, preclude a return to the old way of operating, as it would be political/career suicide. There was much scepticism (quite rightly) and well before the event, as far as I can gather, any questions posed by the guys at the coalface, were answered by the management in order to allay everyone’s fears.
Where it went wrong was on the day of its implementation. There was (and still is) confusion on how the model should operate. Who was supposed to be doing what? What is the chain of command? At what point do HLS hand the aircraft over to FLECS? Etc. etc. Ad nauseam. Luckily, the flying programme at that time of the year was quite light – the reason that the re-organization had been planned for that time – and it was perceived that any flaws in the system could be identified and rectified without too much grief. The problem was that each HLS shift had its own slant on how it should work and was consequently pulling in a different direction to the other 3. To the best of my knowledge, only one shift has tried to operate as the new system dictates and the others are doing what they can, however they can, to achieve the flying programme – see all the previous posts on professional pride - with the consequence that no-one can identify the points where it is all going pear-shaped as there are now several different ways in which people are trying to achieve the same end result.
Nightmare.
There are many posts on this thread from individuals venting their spleen at particular areas of the system that are failing, and I can wholeheartedly understand their concern as they are professional technicians who only want, at the end of the day, to do a good job, get the aircraft out on time every time and live a worry-free life. The fact that so many of these posts exist should be of great concern to those in positions of power (my spies tell me that there are individuals at 2 Gp who are very, very nervous about the way that things are shaping up at Lyneham). I am led to understand that finally, Lyneham engineering management has taken on board (to a degree) the fact that the system needs some serious manipulation in order for it to work and will therefore be having more VSA’s, RIE’s (here we go again) that will (hopefully) sort out all the problems, but this time, the SNCO’s are going to be the major players this time and fundamental in the planning of any further changes. To that end, I suggest that you all have a damn good think on how the system should operate and suggest that you post solutions from here on in and resist the temptation to present more instances of where the system is flawed. Why not send your ideas to the Station Change Team? Anonymously if need be, but if you want to be instrumental in tweaking the system, you have to make sure that your voice is heard, but be advised, a return to the old system will never be sanctioned.
Apologies for rambling on but hopefully this goes some way to filling the gaps in this thread and I hope that I have only presented the facts as opposed to my own emotive views on the subject.
My ideal:
1. All the flying Sqn’s have their own groundcrew. They would have to post people into Lyneham for that to work and that will certainly not happen.
2. Go back to 24/30 and 47/70 engineering. That will work fine until the manpower cuts start to bite and then Eng Wg would disappear up its own fundamental orifice.
3. Something radically different to what is currently in place.
Discuss.
Obe One
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having also done a catch-up of several pages of this sorry saga one conclusion comes leaping out, a major failure of management to plan, brief and control the changes, regardless of the justification for them. It is obvious that those required to impliment the new procedures were not given time and maybe little guidance as to how to introduce them as is shown by the variety of methods between teams. Such confusion is a condemnation of management training in the RAF and perhaps points to a need for more care in deciding appointments in these manpower critical times. I recall an expert specialist engineer who had to get his SENGO tick but was sadly a total disaster when confronted with the day to day control of people, it is difficult to avoid the feeling of deja-vu.
"...I recall an expert specialist engineer who had to get his SENGO tick but was sadly a total disaster when confronted with the day to day control of people"
I think I know who you mean!
I think I know who you mean!